10 replies
by redshift
by tamj123
by redshift
by shanghai sam
First - a quote from the MKB Q250542
NOTE: AOL does not support running the AOL software on Windows NT-based computers, but the current version of their software does not require use of the Msnls.dll file.
Second - AOL had never been developed,designed, or supported for use by NT. Only recently, read apprx. 01-2000, has it begun to even include NT in its considerations. Its focus is Windows HOME market and not the business NT environment. The advent of Windows 2K, and several other business considerations, somewhat forced expansion of the development effort to "enable" AOL to work with Win2k, and inturn NT, in future releases.
Third - there is a bit of misinformation regarding prior version of AOL. Actually, AOL 3.0 and AOL 4.0 in their original revisions (16bit)did work with NT. It was the introduction of Win 95 and the change to a 32bit version of AOL 4.0 for that platform that introduced the "wont work with NT" problem. The work around has, and in many cases continuesto be, use AOL 4.0 16 bit version (often included on many AOL CDs.) Most NT users have been very sucessful with this arrangement. But AOL capabilities are limited to say the least.
by redshift
by pschuvie
Let' try again
First - a quote from the MKB Q250542
NOTE: AOL does not support running the AOL software on Windows NT-based computers, but the current version of their software does not require use of the Msnls.dll file.
Second - AOL had never been developed, designed, or supported for use by NT. Only recently, read apprx. 01-2000, has it begun to even include NT in its considerations. Its focus is Windows HOME market and not the business NT environment. The advent of Windows 2K, andseveral other business considerations, somewhat forced expansion of the development effort to "enable" AOL to work with Win2k, and inturn NT, in future releases.
Third - there is a bit of misinformation regarding prior version of AOL. Actually, AOL 3.0 and AOL 4.0 in their original revisions (16bit)did work with NT. It was the introduction of Win 95 and the change to a 32bit version of AOL 4.0 for that platform that introduced the "wont work with NT" problem. The work around has, and in many cases continues to be, use AOL 4.0 16 bit version (often included on many AOL CDs.) Most NT users have been very sucessful with this arrangement. But AOL capabilities are limited to say the least.
by pschuvie
Fourth - AOL 5.0, introduced October 1999, continued the "wont work with NT" problem but in late Summer 2000 it introduced a revision 204.xxx that was tested and released for the Win2k/NT platform. The kicker here was that you had to sign on to AOL, and download the revision with a Win2k/NT machine in order to get the proper revision number. The installer on AOL CD's of the time did not accept the NT as a valid platform for 5.0, and guess what loaded AOL 4.0 16 bit. Users wanting AOL 5.0 needed to load the 4.0 and do the online upgrade which is available at keyword get50.
Current - AOL 6.0, 10-2000, has the intention of more fully addressing the WinMe/Win2k/NT platforms and has done such, but not without some significant bugs. Thisversion included an automatic upgrade to IE 5.5, similar to the automatic upgrade to IE 5.0 found with AOL 5.0.
In both cases, while Microsoft and AOL might appear to have a close working relationship, it quite simply happens on a very large, yetundisclosed, number of user machines that the TCP/IP stacks are manipulated by each upgrade in such a manner that INTERNET connectivity is lost and it can be a b**** to get it back. Having worked with hundreds of users since Oct 1999, I have personally seen the aggrevation, frustration, and pure wonderment of why it won't work. And in many cases AOL Tech support has not been able to provide a solution.
I personally have not put an NT/AOL platform up(maybe today is the day) but have resources to those who have and if you would care to email me - ITSHERESOMEWHERE@aol.com I would contact them on your behalf for a resolution. There are some additonal questions I would have on your current situation, just so you know.
Hope this has beenof some insight.
by redshift
by redshift
This discussion is closed to new replies.
Trending Desktop posts
Sort by Trending